Sign in

Brian Nosek

@briannosek.bsky.social
12K followers 362 following 5.7K posts

Co-founder of Project Implicit, Society for Improving Psychological Science, and the Center for Open Science; Professor at the University of Virginia

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Brian Nosek
moin syed @syeducation.bsky.social · 01/10/2026
Gave a talk in my dept. on the OSF transition. I wrote up a rough script of the session, which could be of interest to others. I synthesize existing resources and provide my own perspectives. Comments and corrections welcome! zenodo.org/records/2306...
the header for a paper describing "Life after OSF" #metascience
214772
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science @cos.io · 29/09/2026
COS researchers and collaborators have developed and piloted Registered Revisions—an approach designed to reduce uncertainty and publication bias when substantive changes to a study’s analysis are requested during peer review Noah Haber previews what's in the report:
cos.io
What is in the Registered Revisions Meta Trial Development and Pilot Report?
COS Principal Research Scientist Noah Haber shares how the SCORE project developed a collaborative reproducible manuscript workflow, walks through two different approaches, and introduces an open-source R package created from that work.
035
Reposted by Brian Nosek
ReproducibiliTea @reproducibilitea.org · 28/09/2026
☕️Shape the future of Open Research: Join the ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee for 2027! We are thrilled to announce that applications are officially open to join the ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee starting in early 2027.
11013
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Metascience 2027 @metascienceconf.bsky.social · 28/09/2026
Meet the Metascience 2027 Program Steering Committee! This international group is shaping the program for Metascience 2027 on June 14-16, 2027, in Montreal. 🧵👇 #Metascience2027
Graphic with a dark blue geometric background. At top left is the Metascience 2027 Conference logo, and at top right the title "Program Steering Committee." Below are eight headshots in two rows of four, each with a name and affiliation. Top row: Annabel Seyller, Co-Chair, Tanenbaum Open Science Institute; Vincent Larivière, Co-Chair, Université de Montréal; Dominique Roche, SSHRC-CRSH; Moumita Koley, DST-Centre for Policy Research. Bottom row: Gabriel Pelletier, Tanenbaum Open Science Institute; Emmanuel Boakye, African Reproducibility Network; Kelly Cobey, Ottawa Heart Institute; Tim Errington, Center for Open Science. The sponsor logos for The Neuro Tanenbaum Open Science Institute and the Center for Open Science are along the bottom of the graphic.
11310
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 28/09/2026
"an implementation guide for..renewed leadership by Research Performing Organizations in realigning research(er) assessment and incentives to reward quality, transparency, and trustworthiness in research, closing persistent gaps, and reinforcing science’s credibility and utility for society."
elifesciences.org
Responsible Research Assessment of Faculty: maximizing quality, transparency, and trustworthiness of scientific research in Research-Performing Organizations
121
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 25/09/2026
Converging evidence with other systematic reproducibility projects
1162
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Institute for Replication @i4replication.bsky.social · 25/09/2026
Over the past two years, I4R partnered with Psychological Science (@psychscience.bsky.social) on a large reproducibility project. 67 independent teams reproduced 64 articles published in 2024–2025, about 44% of eligible papers. Paper: www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10... Here's what we learned 🧵
18958
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) @improvingpsych.org · 25/09/2026
Support open-access research in psychological science – join the PsyArXiv Moderation team! 🧑‍🏫Moderator training is provided 🕰️Commitment: ~2 hours a month 📝Checking submissions for relevance, scope, and appropriate metadata 🌐Moderation work can be done asynchronously buff.ly/6TlgL7Q
buff.ly
Sign up to be a moderator for PsyArXiv
It is amazing that you are considering becoming a moderator. Moderation is a small job when there are plenty of moderators, which is why we are always on the lookout for people to join the team. We…
056
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science @cos.io · 24/09/2026
📢 COS seeks new members for its Preregistration & Outcome Reporting Advisory Group! The group will review community-developed templates & recommend for inclusion; they will also advise COS on how OSF can support outcome reporting. Honorarium: $1,250. Apply by Oct. 30, 2026:
cos.io
Applications Open: Preregistration and Outcome Reporting Advisory Group
The Center for Open Science (COS) is seeking new members for its Preregistration and Outcome Reporting Advisory Group. Terms begin in December 2026.
022
Reposted by Brian Nosek
The Cochrane Collaboration @cochrane.org · 24/09/2026
INSPECT-SR – a tool for assessing the trustworthiness of randomized controlled trials – has been published today in @bmj.com, giving researchers a structured way to identify problematic studies before they're included in systematic reviews. 🔗 www.cochrane.org/about-us/new... #ResearchIntegrity
“Systematic reviews are only as credible as the studies they include.” — phrased as a Cochrane senior research integrity editor; a magnifying glass rests on stacked papers in the background to emphasize careful scrutiny of research.
03124
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science @cos.io · 22/09/2026
Join us this Thursday, September 24, at 11:00 AM ET to learn how to get started with preregistration on the OSF, including the templates available to support your research. Register: cos-io.zoom.us/webinar/regi...
033
Reposted by Brian Nosek
moin syed @syeducation.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
New paper! Despite qualitative researchers claiming that generalizability is not a goal, their published work does indeed contain generalizable claims. We document this and provide recommendations for how all researchers can better calibrate their generalizability claims. doi.org/10.1177/2515...
article header for, "Qualitative Researchers Can and Do Generalize: Generalizability Claims in Qualitative Psychological Research". Metascience!
619258
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Dan Quintana @dsquintana.bsky.social · 19/09/2026
New preprint! 🎉 I analysed 1660 papers from 4 psychology journals and found materials sharing went from 9% of papers in 2015 to 82% in 2025, and these materials *do* get downloaded — a median of 135 times each. BUT shared code is often hard to run. doi.org/10.31234/osf... Let's walk through it 🧵
Two-panel figure. Panel a is a flow diagram tracking 1,611 empirical psychology articles from publication year (545 in 2015, 552 in 2020, 514 in 2025) to repository-link type: 785 link an OSF project, 85 link another platform, and 741 link no repository. Of those with an OSF link, download counts were retrieved for 670 and not retrieved for 115. Panel b is a line chart of the share of empirical papers linking OSF across 2015, 2020 and 2025. The overall rate, shown as a dashed black line, rises from 9% to 57% to 82%. All four journals rise steeply and end close together: Psychological Science 92%, JESP 89%, JML 83%, Cognition 76%, with Psychological Science highest throughout.Three-panel figure. Panel a: ridgeline plot of downloads per file by material type on a log scale, with the percentage never downloaded labelled for each — archive 16% of 545 files, documents 20% of 2,970, code 12% of 3,471, other 17% of 1,646, data 21% of 10,051, media 35% of 2,120, images 35% of 4,102. Most files cluster between 1 and 10 downloads, with long right tails past 100. Panel b: ridgeline plot of downloads per paper by journal, log scale, with dashed median lines; Psychological Science is highest, then JESP, JML and Cognition. Panel c: stacked bars showing, for documents, data and code separately, the share of papers by download band (0, 1–10, 11–100, more than 100) in 2015, 2020 and 2025. The share exceeding 100 downloads falls sharply over time in all three types, from roughly two-thirds in 2015 to a quarter or less in 2025, as the 1–10 band grows.Four-panel figure. Panel a: statistical languages detected among 333 papers with retrievable code — R 88%, SPSS 12%, Stata 4%, SAS 1%. Panel b: code red flags among those 333 papers — 34% hard-code an absolute path, 40% reference a missing file — above documentation among 672 OSF-linked papers — 21% have a README, 30% are documented by README, description or wiki. Panel c: among 562 Elsevier papers with no repository link, 44% (245) host at least one journal supplementary file but only 14% (77) host data, code or an archive. Panel d: composition of those 448 hosted files — documents 52%, data 21%, media 9%, other 7%, archive 6%, code 3%, images 1%. The code panels are green, the journal-supplement panels blue.Coefficient plot (download predictors)

Dot-and-whisker plot of three standardised predictors of OSF download volume, each with a 95% confidence interval. Repository size (number of files) has the largest effect at about 0.76, citations about 0.38, and altmetric attention about 0.12. All three intervals sit entirely above zero, so each predicts more downloads, with repository size roughly twice the effect of citations and six times that of attention. X-axis: standardised effect, −0.2 to 1.0.
4265113
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Josh de Leeuw @joshdeleeuw.bsky.social · 21/09/2026
DataPipe (pipe.jspsych.org) is ready for its post-OSF life. You can use it as before to save data from online experiments, but now the data can be sent to Zenodo, Google Drive, or a Dataverse instance. Existing OSF connections work until 11/16 I took this opportunity to do some major updates...
pipe.jspsych.org
DataPipe
13217
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 21/09/2026
"authors could not answer...even basic questions about the paper...difficult to see how they could have verified the paper’s contents" medium.com/@TmlrOrg/ask...
medium.com
Asking Authors About Their Own Papers
By Nihar B. Shah
52918
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Dan Quintana @dsquintana.bsky.social · 21/09/2026
Is it worth putting in all the effort needed to make your materials open if there’s a chance that no one will download them? I still think so, for two reasons:
12512
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 17/09/2026
"An..LLM pipeline [conducted] 1,328 in-sample replications, [and] 1,005..out-of-sample tests. In sample, 75% reproduce the published sign and significance, and the median coefficient recovers 0.93 of the published value. Out of sample, the rate falls to 42%, and the median coefficient ratio to 0.45"
papers.ssrn.com
Does Empirical Finance Replicate?
An autonomous LLM pipeline rebuilds each result from the paper and available databases, with independent audits of every replication. I obtain 1,328 in-sample r
3192
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Benedek Kurdi @benedek.bsky.social · 17/09/2026
🚀 Project Implicit’s critical work continues! Our website remains fully operational 24/7, collecting data and launching new studies. We are finalizing a new organizational structure to carry our research and educational mission forward. Thank you to our global community. ➡️ implicit.harvard.edu
September 17, 2026
Project Implicit Continues its Critical Work
We are more excited than ever to not only continue but to expand the scientific collabora-tion at the heart of Project Implicit. With the non-profit that served as our operational home for two decades shutting down, a new organizational structure is being finalized to carry our research and educational mission forward.
In the meantime, the Project Implicit website (http://implicit.harvard.edu/) remains fully operational and continues to collect data 24/7. New studies, programs, and educational ef-forts are actively underway. We expect public data to remain available in perpetuity, and new data from 2026 will be released in January of next year.
We express our deep gratitude to everyone who has helped create, sustain, and grow Pro-ject Implicit. This includes the founders, members of the Board of Directors and the Scien-tific Advisory Board, staff members of the non-profit, international collaborators, and the students across dozens of labs tending to tasks big and small. We are also thankful to our generous donors who have answered our calls and supported our mission, and especially the millions of annual visitors who continue to honor us with their curiosity, time, and data.
We look forward to providing more details in the weeks ahead.
Jordan Axt, McGill University
Yoav Bar-Anan, Tel-Aviv University
Benedek Kurdi, University of Illinois
Calvin Lai, Rutgers University
Ryan Lei, Haverford College
Curtis Phills, University of Oregon
Kate Ratliff, University of Waterloo
Colin Tucker Smith, Wilfrid Laurier University
Jennifer Steele, York University
Heidi Vuletich, University of Denver
02215
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 14/09/2026
I am sad to share that Project Implicit, my first non-profit and foundation of my career, is closing. The IAT website will continue, managed by the next generation of leaders in implicit bias research. Here's the statement I posted to LinkedIn. It didn't vibe right as a bsky thread.
55426
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 13/09/2026
Article now retracted. Retraction notice focuses on data sharing, but doesn't mention - the ethics review body is the author's own company - the tech used to to collect the data by intercepting users' LLM prompts does not exist ht @grinschglsandra.bsky.social psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/202...
psycnet.apa.org
APA PsycNet
511435
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 12/09/2026
The cover-up is always worse than the crime? Harvard's latest filing says that Gino manipulated a file to cover-up fabrication, hid the laptop used to do it during the discovery process, and did more [redacted] destruction of evidence after being compelled by the court to share the laptop.
38130
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Ruben C. Arslan @ruben.the100.ci · 11/09/2026
An interesting thing is happening to me at the moment. I have a standing bug bounty policy for my first authored scientific work. That means, I've committed to pay people who report bugs in my code, up to 750€ for severe errors. Since GPT-6 Astra came out, I'm now getting several bug reports daily.
39334
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science @cos.io · 10/09/2026
🎉 COS has established an independent subsidiary organization in Brussels! While the Belgian organization is legally independent from COS in the US, it will not operate separately—it's part of one integrated, global COS organization with a shared mission, strategy, & brand
cos.io
A New Chapter for COS in Europe
The Center for Open Science (COS) has officially established an independent subsidiary organization in Brussels, Belgium. This presence gives COS flexibility to engage with European institutions, organizations, funders, and communities.
02815
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 10/09/2026
The Center for Open Science has officially incorporated in the EU by opening a (virtual) office in Brussels. More information on this important step is in this post. www.cos.io/blog/a-new-c...
cos.io
A New Chapter for COS in Europe
The Center for Open Science (COS) has officially established an independent subsidiary organization in Brussels, Belgium. This presence gives COS flexibility to engage with European institutions, orga...
1143
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 10/09/2026
Extremely impressive field experiment by @nmalhotra.bsky.social et al. had few effects on election attitudes among conservatives in TX despite being "exposed to an average of 20 online videos, 18.5 cable TV videos, 23.9 display ads, 3 text messages, and 3 postcards" www.science.org/doi/full/10....
110733
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science @cos.io · 10/09/2026
A clarification on the OSF changes: A recent Nature article incorrectly says private projects will become public. They will not, and we’ve asked for a correction. On Feb. 19, all projects become read-only. Public content stays available; private content stays private. Details: www.cos.io/osf-changes
cos.io
OSF Changes | Center for Open Science
We are preparing substantial changes to OSF that will reduce its functionality, focus OSF on its unique strengths, and move toward an integrated model with complementary services. As part of that shif...
2129
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Alexander Berger @albrgr.bsky.social · 09/09/2026
We also launched a big specific call for founders for ambitious new AI safety initiatives today: coefficientgiving.org/tailwind/ So much more to be doing here!
coefficientgiving.org
Project Tailwind
Project Tailwind is Coefficient Giving's call for founders to launch ambitious AI safety initiatives.
3229
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 09/09/2026
Noah is leading our effort to do a naturalistic randomized trial on a variant of the Registered Reports publishing model. Registered Revisions implements randomization at Revise-and-resubmit stage for new data or analyses. Here's a thread and preprint with the latest.
0115
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Noah Haber @whaleactually.com · 08/09/2026
... and that's where Registered Revisions comes in The Registered Revisions Meta Trial Pilot Report is OUT NOW!! osf.io/preprints/me... But new(ish) policy involves developing a new(ish) multi-headed trial design, workflows, infrastructure, piloting, mistakes, and a super team. And it's all here.
22117
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Amanda Kay Montoya @akmontoya.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Curious about Zenodo as an OSF Project alternative? Here's a short video to get you started: File Uploads, Communities, and generating links for Anonymous Peer Review. youtu.be/jW84PxuJTMw
youtu.be
Getting Started with Zenodo (transitioning from OSF Projects)
YouTube video by AMANDA MONTOYA
67440
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Incredibly important work surfacing the risks and needs for improving processes for responsible data sharing.
0107
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 05/09/2026
I am receiving daily emails from different people asking for feedback on their new service where the tools, emails, and requests are eerily similar. If it were a single occasion, I wouldn't think twice. Together, it makes a collective uncanny valley. Are people using LLMs or are LLMs using people?
3190
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Institute for Replication @i4replication.bsky.social · 04/09/2026
🧵 New DP from I4R co-director Lester Lusher, with Sonia Ale, Md Shafiqui Islam, Huda Osman & Jacob Stenstrom (Pitt): "When Samples Shape Significance." What happens when you re-estimate published results using fresh draws of the same data? Some evidence from Google Trends!
12914
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 03/09/2026
With all this data center brouhaha, Gen X'ers just shake their heads remembering the search for extra-terrestrials.
120
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science @cos.io · 02/09/2026
If you missed last week's Changes to OSF Projects: Overview and Q&A webinar, catch up with the materials linked below. Review what’s changing and why, key dates, and implications for users: 📹 Recording: www.youtube.com/watc... 🖥️ Slides: www.cos.io/hubfs/Ema... ❓ Q&A: www.cos.io/hubfs/OSF...
youtube.com
Changes to OSF Projects: Overview and Q&A
During this webinar, we explained why changes to the OSF are happening, reviewed the key dates and what they mean for users, clarified what will and will not change, and shared practical guidance for preparing for the transition. The second half of the webinar was a moderated Q&A with representative
037
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 03/09/2026
For the Replicability Project: Health Behavior we need some editors and reviewers of analysis plans for secondary data replications, especially for complex designs including multilevel, weighting, clustering, missing data. Earns coauthorship on the summary paper. Interested? replications@cos.io
01514
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Beth Clarke @bethclarke.bsky.social · 02/09/2026
Really enjoyed chatting with Randy! I highly recommend checking out his podcast if you haven’t already @metasciencematters.bsky.social
0156
Reposted by Brian Nosek
simine vazire @simine.com · 02/09/2026
Psych Science has retracted Ariely & Wertenbroch (2002). The second author requested the retraction. Both authors agreed to it. journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.... So grateful to @datacolada.bsky.social for these blog posts and the work behind them: datacolada.org/138 and datacolada.org/139 1/2
journals.sagepub.com
Sage Journals: Discover world-class research
Subscription and open access journals from Sage, the world's leading independent academic publisher.
426794
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 02/09/2026
Completely and utterly astonishing.
0122
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Data Colada @datacolada.bsky.social · 02/09/2026
Colada[139] Artificial Deadlines Part 2 Evidence of fraud in the 25 year old gradesheet behind the key finding in an influential paper on deadlines and procrastination. datacolada.org/139
816857
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Dan Hirschman @asociologist.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
Science writ large is under assault. I hope folks in the social sciences keep this in mind as we sort through competing explanations of “what went wrong” - it’s got to be more than something specific to any one field, or even to the social sciences as a whole.
79432
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
Two years ago @mvreiss.bsky.social and I reproduced a paper for @i4replication.bsky.social's mass reproduction project. It reproduced cleanly, and we still came away seeing how fragile these pipelines can be: a hard-coded path, an updated package, an undocumented manual step. Hence this Comment.
1105
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Daniel Lakens @lakens.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
I was a reviewer of this paper. It took many revisions to get the author to state his definition of 'replication' is extremely wide, and I agree with @edouardmachery.bsky.social. If I say 'this completely different study replicates findings X' this is not a true replication. Indeed, it is exactly >
1205
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Matt Makel @mattmakel.bsky.social · 31/08/2026
I made a mistake. And because of that mistake, I no longer have confidence that results that I reported in several research papers are an accurate reflection of replication rates. 1/
19430
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Data Colada @datacolada.bsky.social · 31/08/2026
An influential paper by Ariely & Wertenbroch (2002) reported two studies with tampered data. Post 1 of 2. datacolada.org/138
datacolada.org
[138] Artificial Deadlines (Part 1): Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Study About Procrastination
A new paper in Psychological Science (.htm) reports a failure to replicate Study 2 of Ariely and Wertenbroch’s influential article entitled, “Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self-Contr…
723799
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Lukas Röseler @aufdroeseler.bsky.social · 29/08/2026
Very interesting simulation by Harper and @nicebread.bsky.social on optimal share of replications. I cannot decide what is most exciting about it so I recommend you read the whole thing.
Plots with tesults from the paper, eg showing how publicatipm boas can diminish (simulated) scientific progress
12911
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 27/08/2026
Much of my most impactful contributions in research are largely descriptive, without explicitly saying so. Psych Science leading the way in highlighting the value and importance of description.
1566
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 25/08/2026
Some people really are heroes.
040
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Alex Zalben @azalben.bsky.social · 25/08/2026
Dolly Parton, among a thousand other amazing things she did in her life, gifted over 330 million books to kids through her Imagination Library program. Her passing is a tremendous loss to the world, but you can support the program today to keep it going imaginationlibrary.com
imaginationlibrary.com
Dolly Parton's Imagination Library | USA, UK, IE, CA, AU
Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library is a book gifting program that mails free books to children from birth until they begin school in participating areas.
45121525979
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1.bsky.social · 25/08/2026
Reminder: Dolly Parton helped fund the Moderna vaccine for COVID.
nytimes.com
Dolly Parton, who helped fund the Moderna vaccine, gets a ‘dose of her own medicine.’ (Published 2021)
The country music star broke into song before she was inoculated, and urged her fans to “get out there and get your shot.”
247238605776